Tourism Industry Survey of South Africa: COVID-19Impact, Mitigation and the FutureAPRIL 2020: SURVEY 1
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
2
ForewordTourism is one of South Africa’s most important sectors. Last year we received 10.4 million international tourism trips and tourism saw a total injection of R273.2 billion into the South African economy in 2018.1 Tourism supports 740,000 direct jobs and over 1.5 million jobs across the economy. The sector is the lifeblood for many micro and small enterprises, often the only economic activity in rural and remote areas, and creates employment opportunities for men, women and youth across the country. We are going through an unprecedented crisis, and there is urgent need to support our existing industry and plan for longer-term recovery.
This survey is a collaboration between IFC, Department of Tourism, and TBCSA and all its member associations. It aims to quantify the extent of the impact of COVID-19, how effective the support has been, and what kind of help is still required. We will survey the industry three times in total over the next 12 months to track progress.
The key findings have been published on the partner’s platforms and shared widely with key decision-makers in government, financial institutions and development partners. We hope these insights can inform the effective design of policy and support to your business.
Thank you to the 1610 respondents who took the time to complete the survey, your contribution to the recovery of our sector is much appreciated.
1 StatsSA Tourism Satellite Account 2019.
Blacky Komani Board Chairman, TBCSA
3
Highlights• 99% of responding firms are affected by COVID-19.
• 64% feel neutral or positively believe their business will survive to take part in the recovery.
• 83% of firms report revenues in March 2020 are down more than 50% compared to March 2019, and 34% of firms say revenues are 100% less.
• 58% of firms were unable to service their debts and 54% of firms were unable to cover fixed costs in March 2020.
• Firms so far report having managed their workforce in different ways, with most favoring reduced wages over furlough or redundancies. 50% of firms have reduced wages for more than 50% of staff, and 36% of firms have reduced wages for all staff. 11% of firms have made more than 50% of their workforce redundant, and 53% have not made any redundancies.
• A greater proportion (75%) of medium businesses have reduced wages than small businesses, and a greater proportion (31%) of small businesses have applied redundancies.
• The most commonly applied mitigation measures by businesses are temporary closure at 69%, supporting deferment instead of cancellation at 60%, and significant downscaling at 58%.
• All businesses prioritized the need for financial support for cashflow, financial support for recovery, and tax relief.
• Micro firms claim cashflow is their first priority, small firms prioritize financial support for recovery, and both medium and large firms prioritized tax relief.
• The support facilities with the most respondent awareness are the UIF scheme and the Tourism Relief Fund of the Department of Tourism. There has been strong uptake for all facilities, but success rates in these early days are uniformly low.
Respondent Profile Summary• 1610 total respondents.
• 50% operate in the Western Cape, the remainder across the country.
• 66% are micro with 1 - 10 employees.
• 52% have annual turnover of R0 - 3m.
• 46% are accommodation providers, 20% are tour operators, and the rest split between activity providers, Meetings, Incentives, Conventions and Exhibitions (MICE), conservancy-related, community-based, transport and other.
• 62% of firms are 10 years or older.
4
Growing In decline Stagnant
40% 28%
32%
Results
OverviewBefore COVID-19, in February 2020, the performance and optimism around the South African tourism economy was relatively positive. 40% of responding firms claim they were growing, with a further 32% performing at a constant level. Most firms felt either neutral or positive about the future of their business and tourism in South Africa.
After the first 6 weeks of feeling the impact of COVID-19, 99% of firms claim to be affected by the pandemic. Only 23% feel neutral or optimistic about the future.
BEFORE COVID-1979% felt neutral or optimistic about their business and the future of tourism in SA.
NOW IN APRIL 202023% feel neutral or optimistic about their business and the future of tourism in SA.
Not at all Very much
10% 11% 18% 21% 40%
64% feel neutral or positively believe their business will survive to take part in the recovery.
Not at all Very optimistic
50% 28% 14% 5% 4%
Not at all Very optimistic
9% 27% 35% 16% 13%
5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Business impact of COVID-19REVENUE83% of firms report revenues in March 2020 are down more than 50% compared to March 2019, and 34% of firms say revenues are 100% less.
DEBT SERVICE58% of firms were unable to service their debts in March 2020.
FIXED COSTS54% of firms were unable to cover fixed costs in March 2020.
OCCUPANCY/CUSTOMER USE85% of firms state occupancy in March 2020 is down more than 50% compared to March 2019, and 47% say occupancies are 100% less.
FORWARD BOOKINGS81% of firms report forward bookings held in March 2020 are at least 50% less than bookings held in March 2019, and 36% hold 100% fewer bookings.
Down 100%
Down 50% or more
Responding firms
Down 100%
Down 50% or more
Down 100%
Down 50% or more
No
Yes
I don’t know
Not applicable
7%5.9%
57.8%29.2%
5.2% 1.3%
54.2%
39.4%
34%
83%
47%
85%
50%
81%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Responding firms
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Responding firms
6
SUB-SECTOREnterprises in conservancies, MICE and activity providers have seen the most dramatic loss in revenue, with the accommodation sector seeing the least decline. Conservancies are the worst affected in holding any forward bookings, followed by transport, and accommodation. Tour operators have so far held the most of their forward bookings.
Micro Small Medium Large Total
% of firms with more than 50% revenue decline
83% 83% 76% 80% 83%
Average (mean) percentage revenue decline in March 2019, compared to March 2020
-72% -70% -63% -62% -71%
Accommodation Activity/ experience
Community- based
Conservancy/ protected area
MICE Tour operator
Transport Other Total
Average (mean) percentage revenue decline March 2019, compared to March 2020
-66% -80% -76% -87% -83% -74% -69% -73% -71%
Average (mean) forward bookings decline in March 2019, compared to March 2020
-72% -71% -83% -73% -70% -66% -73% -69% -70%
Business impact: Insights
SIZE OF FIRMMicro and small firms are slightly more affected in terms of loss of revenue, but all sizes are suffering.
7
Mitigation measures
Employment measuresFirms so far report having managed their workforce in different ways, with most favoring reduced wages over furlough or redundancies. Most firms have directed their attentions to either ‘all’ or just ten percent of the workforce.
REDUCED WAGES50% of firms have reduced wages for more than 50% of staff, and 36% of firms have reduced wages for all staff. 18%, however, have not reduced wages at all.
REDUNDANCIES11% of firms have made more than 50% of staff redundant, and 7% of firms made all staff redundant. 53%, however, have not made any redundancies.
FURLOUGHED STAFF32% of firms have furloughed more than 50% of staff, and 18% of firms have furloughed all staff. 33% have not put any staff on furlough.
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Non
e
0 -
9
10 -
19
20 -
29
30 -
39
40 -
49
50 -
59
60 -
69
70 -
79
80 -
89
90 -
100 A
ll
32.6%30.5%
2.6% 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1%2.6%
4.7%
18.4%
3%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Non
e
0 -
9
10 -
19
20 -
29
30 -
39
40 -
49
50 -
59
60 -
69
70 -
79
80 -
89
90 -
100 All
53%
31.1%
1.9% 0.9% 0.8% 1.2% 0.5% 0.1% 0.4% 1.3%
7.3%
1.5%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Non
e
0 -
9
10 -
19
20 -
29
30 -
39
40 -
49
50 -
59
60 -
69
70 -
79
80 -
89
90 -
100 All
17.9%
26%
3%1.3% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 1% 2.6%
7.3%
36%
2.3%
% of staff on reduced wages
% of staff furloughed
% of staff made redundant
Res
pond
ing
firm
sR
espo
ndin
g fir
ms
Res
pond
ing
firm
s
8
Mitigation measures: Employment measures insights
SUB-SECTORThe table below shows the percentage of each type of firm that has introduced these measures to more than 50% of staff. Proportionally, the MICE and conservancy sub-sectors have been most active in reducing staff wages, tour operators and transport are the sub-sectors that have put proportionally more of their staff on furlough, and activity/experience providers and community-based enterprises are the leading sub-sectors in terms of making more than half their staff redundant.
Micro Small Medium Large Total
Reduced wages 42% 64% 75% 61% 50%
Furloughed staff 27% 38% 38% 26% 32%
Redundancies 11% 31% 12% 4% 11%
Accommodation Activity/ experience
Community- based
Conservancy/ protected area
MICE Tour operator
Transport Other Total
Reduced wages 52% 37% 13% 77% 57% 52% 47% 50% 50%
Furloughed staff 34% 25% 25% 27% 27% 36% 36% 25% 32%
Redundancies 9% 17% 50% 14% 9% 15% 9% 10% 11%
SIZE OF FIRMThe table below shows the percentage of each size of firm that has introduced these measures to more than 50% of staff. Proportionally, the workforce of small and medium business has been more impacted by these measures than the workforces of micro and large. A greater proportion of medium businesses have reduced wages than small businesses, and a greater proportion of small businesses have applied redundancies.
9
Mitigation measures: Other measures
Already done Considering Not considering Not applicable I don’t know
Introduced vouchers 18% 23% 18% 33% 8%
Introduced alternative products 13% 29% 11% 42% 5%
Amended cancellations/ refund policies
53% 18% 8% 19% 2%
Supported deferment instead of cancellation
60% 16% 5% 16% 3%
Provided refunds 54% 13% 11% 19% 3%
Offered lower prices 28% 29% 19% 21% 2%
Adjusted marketing strategies 36% 45% 5% 12% 3%
Borrowed capital from bank, family/friends, other
25% 36% 24% 12% 3%
Upskilling staff through online courses and webinars
17% 23% 22% 36% 2%
Investing in renovations, upgrades or business improvements
13% 19% 46% 21% 1%
Canceled planned upgrades, expansions or improvements
51% 15% 11% 22% 1%
Significant downscaling 58% 17% 8% 15% 2%
Temporary closure 69% 10% 14% 6% 2%
Permanent closure 2% 26% 53% 9% 9%
Firms have put in place a variety of measures to help mitigate against the impacts on their business. The most commonly applied measures are temporary closure at 69%, supporting deferment of bookings instead of cancellation at 60%, and significant downscaling at 58%. 54% of respondents have awarded refunds, affecting revenues, and 51% have canceled planned investments or upgrades which will have consequences for other areas of the economy. On the more positive side, only 28% have lowered prices, 25% have already borrowed capital, and 17% are investing in upskilling staff. 53% of responding firms are not, so far, considering permanent closure.
10
Mitigation measures: ‘Other measures’ insights
Micro Small Medium Large Total
Introduced vouchers 14% 23% 31% 33% 18%
Introduced alternative products 10% 19% 17% 26% 13%
Amended cancellations/ refund policies
48% 61% 67% 86% 53%
Supported deferment instead of cancellation
54% 71% 73% 82% 60%
Provided refunds 51% 58% 60% 67% 54%
Offered lower prices 24% 29% 44% 56% 28%
Adjusted marketing strategies 30% 42% 58% 60% 36%
Borrowed capital from bank, family/friends, other
24% 30% 19% 26% 25%
Upskilling staff through online courses and webinars
15% 16% 27% 30% 17%
Investing in renovations, upgrades or business improvements
15% 10% 9% 11% 13%
Canceled planned upgrades, expansions or improvements
47% 58% 61% 65% 51%
Significant downscaling 53% 70% 73% 75% 59%
Temporary closure 65% 75% 77% 79% 69%
Permanent closure 2% 2% 2% 5% 2%
SIZE OF FIRMLarge and medium sized firms have been proportionally more active in amending refund and cancellation policies, supporting deferred travel and upskilling staff. Smaller firms have managed to more effectively maintain prices than larger firms, have downscaled less, and are investing proportionally more in business upgrades or improvements. Smaller businesses also report fewer temporary and permanent closures than larger businesses. 65% of larger firms have canceled planned investments or upgrades, much more so than other sizes of firm, and have proportionally closed more of their operations permanently
11
SUB-SECTOR• The accommodation sub-sector is the group to have issued the most
refunds at 64% and lowered prices the most at 36%. It is also the sub-segment with the most temporary closures at 82% compared to all firms at 69%.
• Activity and experience providers have seen the largest amount of permanent closures at 4%, with a further 24% considering it.
• Community-based enterprises have implemented proportionally the fewest measures across the board, and they are also the lowest in terms of temporary closures (at only 38%), possibly reflecting their lower market dependence and debt exposure. At 13% they have borrowed the least capital.
• Conservancies, reserves or enterprises in protected areas are the largest sub-sector to have borrowed at 36% and are the largest group to have canceled planned upgrades at 77%.
• The MICE sector has most strongly supported deferment instead of cancellation at 73% and invested the most in upskilling staff at 38%.
• Just 20% of tour operators have borrowed capital (compared to all firms at 25%), and 35% are considering it.
• Transport is proportionally the largest sub-sector to have downscaled (66% of the sub-sector) and lowered prices – at 36%.
12
Accommodation Activity/ experience
Community- based
Conservancy/ protected area
MICE Tour operator
Transport Other Total
Introduced vouchers
20% 12% 0% 14% 5% 22% 19% 15% 18%
Introduced alternative products
9% 10% 13% 27% 31% 13% 23% 17% 13%
Amended cancellations/ refund policies
61% 40% 38% 41% 51% 57% 56% 35% 53%
Supported deferment instead of cancellation
64% 48% 0% 55% 73% 68% 54% 45% 60%
Provided refunds 64% 37% 25% 50% 45% 56% 51% 35% 54%
Offered lower prices
36% 19% 0% 18% 29% 21% 36% 16% 28%
Adjusted marketing strategies
37% 29% 25% 50% 53% 29% 37% 37% 36%
Borrowed capital from bank, family/friends, other
29% 29% 13% 36% 23% 20% 26% 16% 25%
Upskilling staff through online courses and webinars
9% 17% 13% 18% 38% 23% 17% 28% 17%
Investing in renovations, upgrades or business improvements
18% 13% 0% 5% 7% 9% 6% 9% 13%
Canceled planned upgrades, expansions or improvements
56% 47% 13% 77% 55% 45% 43% 45% 51%
Significant downscaling
65% 52% 25% 64% 52% 54% 66% 50% 59%
Temporary closure
82% 63% 38% 64% 64% 54% 54% 56% 69%
Permanent closure
2% 4% 0% 0% 1% 2% 1% 2%% 2%
13
Support measuresResponding firms indicated their awareness and uptake of the following supporting mechanisms. The facilities with the most awareness are the UIF scheme and the Tourism Relief Fund of the Department of Tourism. Known eligibility is highest for the UIF scheme and the SARS tax subsidy, and there has been strong uptake for all facilities, with IDC and SARS having the least applications. Success rates in these early days are uniformly low.
Aware Of those aware, know eligible
Of those know eligible, applied
Of those applied, successful
Of those applied, perceive value
SMME Relief Fund 30% 53% 68% 1% 1%
IDC Corporate Plan 19% 19% 37% 9% 6%
Department of Tourism Relief Fund
84% 39% 60% 2% 2%
UIF scheme 96% 67% 69% 5% 3%
SARS tax subsidy 63% 49% 35% 12% 7%
Solidarity fund 69% 23% 48% 1% 1%
SA Future Trust 20% 42% 55% 14% 8%
14
‘Other requests’2 for support include: ‘more customers’, ‘support for freelance guides’, ‘national marketing to support recovery’, ‘permits for animal culling to support sales of meat as alternative revenue’, ‘terminate lock down and open the borders’, ‘equality throughout, not schemes that only privilege certain groups’, ‘solutions that do not encourage business to take out debt’, ‘better service and value for money in South African tourism’.
NeedsFirms selected their top five outstanding needs. The five most repeated needs from all firms in April 2020 are: liquidity (cashflow), financial support for recovery, tax relief, expert advice on business recovery, and support in debt repayments.
2 These are not verbatim to protect identities of respondents.
Fina
ncia
l sup
port
for
cas
hflow
Fina
ncia
l sup
port
for
rec
over
y
Tax
redu
ctio
ns o
r de
ferm
ents
Exp
ert
advi
ce o
n bu
sine
ss s
trat
egy
and
reco
very
Com
mer
cial
deb
t re
paym
ent
supp
ort
Bes
t pr
acti
ces
shar
ed f
rom
oth
er b
usin
esse
s
Res
earc
h an
d fo
reca
sts
for
busi
ness
pla
nnin
g
Adv
ice
on c
omm
unic
atin
g w
ith
cust
omer
s/bu
yers
Vir
tual
tra
inin
g fo
r up
skill
ing
entr
epre
neur
s an
d st
aff
Adv
ice
on h
ealt
h an
d sa
fety
pre
caut
ions
or
cert
ifica
tion
Oth
er
I do
n’t
know
Non
e
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
15
Needs: Insights
Micro Small Medium Large Total
Advice on communicating with customers
18% 15% 17% 12% 17%
Advice on health and safety
12% 10% 13% 25% 13%
Financial support for cashflow
64% 69% 67% 54% 66%
Financial support for recovery
62% 72% 52% 44% 63%
Tax relief 42% 57% 64% 54% 47%
Commercial debt repayment support
22% 34% 27% 32% 25%
Research/forecasts for business planning
20% 18% 27% 23% 20%
Best practices from other business
22% 27% 37% 26% 25%
Expert advice on business recovery
33% 32% 29% 19% 32%
Virtual training for upskilling
14% 12% 12% 11% 13%
SIZE OF FIRMThe graphic below shows the percentage of each size of firm that identified a particular need. For example, 18% of all micro firms require advice on communicating with customers. Results show that all sizes of firm prioritize financial support for cash-flow and recovery and tax relief. Micro firms claim cashflow is their first priority, small firms prioritize financial support for recovery, and both medium and large firms prioritized tax relief. Out of all the firms, small firms were the highest supporters of the need for financial assistance in all forms. Medium sized firms were the highest supporters of research for business planning and best practices from other businesses, indicating that they are starting to look forward and lack the tools to do so.
16
SUB-SECTORThe graphic below shows the percentage of firm-type that identified a particular need. For example, 16% of all accommodation firms require advice on communicating with customers. All sub-segments follow similar patterns to each other, indicating that there are few specific needs relevant to specific sub-sectors. All require financial support as first priority – particularly the community-based enterprises and businesses in conservancies. Community-based enterprises have also indicated a higher than average need for advice on communicating with customers, and health and safety.
Accommodation Activity/ experience
Community- based
Conservancy/ protected area
MICE Tour operator
Transport Other Total
Advice on communicating with customers
16% 19% 38% 14% 13% 18% 14% 18% 17%
Advice on health and safety
19% 7% 38% 9% 10% 5% 9% 6% 13%
Financial support for cashflow
67% 64% 75% 72% 66% 63% 60% 61% 66%
Financial support for recovery
63% 68% 75% 59% 62% 63% 63% 57% 63%
Tax relief 46% 52% 0% 50% 45% 48% 60% 43% 47%
Commercial debt repayment support
25% 23% 0% 50% 22% 29% 37% 17% 25%
Research/forecasts for business planning
18% 28% 25% 18% 25% 22% 23% 22% 20%
Best practices from other business
24% 18% 0% 23% 27% 29% 26% 22% 25%
Expert advice on business recovery
34% 29% 38% 18% 31% 33% 31% 28% 32%
Virtual training for upskilling
12% 15% 13% 14% 18% 14% 13% 16% 13%
17
MethodologyOur survey sample is made up of a wide spectrum of tourism businesses across South Africa. The survey was distributed through the networks of the Department of Tourism, and the Tourism Business Council of South Africa and all its member associations.
The questionnaire was sent out on Saturday, 11th April 2020 and closed on Thursday, 16th April 2020. The questionnaire was distributed electronically by email. It had five sections: general profile questions (which provide a breakdown of the type of responding businesses); questions on the business impact of COVID-19; questions on the business’s response; the support measures available; and outstanding needs of the businesses.
Profile of responding businessesThe survey yielded 1610 responses. 20 were discounted from the analysis, those who did not indicate their number of employees (10 micro businesses) and those who responded ‘no’ to whether they were affected by COVID-19 (10 MICE businesses).
The profile of respondents can be seen below:
SIZE OF FIRM BY NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES3
3 Size has been determined by number of employees. 1 - 10 = micro; 11 - 50 = small; 51 - 250 = medium; 251 + = large.
Survey details
Accommodation
Activity/experience
Community-based
Conservative/protected areas
MICE
Tour operator
Transport
Other
736
163
822
77
314
70
199
Growing Constant Decline
4%
52%
8%11%
8% 8%4% 5%
I do
n’t
know
0 -
3
3 -
5
5 -
15
15 -
40
40 -
200
200
- 50
0
500
+
60% +
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Micro
Small
Medium
Large
35% 29% 36%
48% 29% 22%
60% 16% 25%
54% 20% 26%
Micro
Small
Medium
Large
TURNOVER IN RANDS (MN)
TYPE OF FIRM
PERFORMANCE OF FIRM BY SIZE (FEBRUARY 2020)
67%
22%
8%
4%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
18
FIRM TYPE BY PRIMARY PRODUCT OR SERVICE
AGE OF BUSINESS IN FEBRUARY 2020
PROVINCE(S) OF OPERATIONS PRIMARY MARKET
Eastern Cape
Free State
Gauteng
KwaZulu-Natal
Limpopo
Mpumalanga
North West
Northern Cape
Western Cape
International Domestic Africa region
64%
22% 63%
50%
38%
2% - Not applicable
37%
32%
31%
19%
19%
17%
27%
46%
20%
13%10%
5% 4%1% 1%
Acc
omm
odat
ion
Act
ivit
y/ex
peri
ence
Com
mun
ity-
base
d
Con
serv
ativ
e/pr
otec
ted
area
s
MIC
E
Tour
ope
rato
r
Tra
nspo
rt
Oth
er
70%+
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
3%
8%
23%
66%
0%
0 -
1
1 -
3
3 -
10
10 +
I do
n’t
know
70%+
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%